Bought car at dealship, now they want to sue me???

[Killer50stang]

I bought a car over 3 months ago and within the first couple of days, I noticed the rear window didn't work and the regulartor was broken. Called the stealership and told them and they said they didn't know it was broke but sorry about your luck and would not over the charges. Contract states 50% of tranny/engine issues only AS IS. So I let it slide and paid $270 of charges for repair and then the switch broke on the other window a day later, and also found the sun roof was half broke and made a horrilbe noise when shutting.

I let all this slide when a week later the tranmission started hanging in gear and would not shift right. This time I knew half was covered. They agreed to get the tranny flushed and go from there. I got it flushed and problem still occurrs and the mechanic said there was metal shavings in the fluid and I should get rid of the car or take it back due to repairs of $3200 for replacement tranny (foreign car). Stealership at this point refused to take it back and wrote a check for half the balance.

I paid $10k+ for the car and decided to sell the car and buy something cheaper to fix and something I can work on since the contract stated they would cover 50% of issues and didn't say it had to be fixed within a period of time. I took the remaining and put it towards my loan and sold the car, still oweing about $2,000 with the check I kept. I only did this because the stealership would not fix it even though I owned it for two weeks and the mechanic said these were prone for transmission and engine problems and even if I fix it, it will happen again in a short period of time.

Is this wrong? Should I have to pay for $3,000 worth of work in the first two weeks of owning a car with only 60k miles on it? The stealership still says there was nothing wrong with it when there clearly was. Now they call me and want a recepit to prove it was fixed and I told them I don't have one and he wants to take me to court. I feel I was mislead and sold a Lemon and feel if he does this I could counter sue for fraud. What do you guys think?

 

[87foxstang]

Im not sure if I can give you any advice, but damn thats messed up...sorry about that

 

[cenok is family]

i think you should do a free consultation with a lawyer and see what your options are. but that's total BS, i HATE car dealerships for that reason. good luck with it all though man. i'd make a list of all the problems you've already had with the car, as well as an estimate of how much it costs to fix it all and DEFINITELY threaten to counter sue.

 

[Killer50stang]

The problem is, could I get in trouble for not fixing it?

 

[hamonkeiser]

Alot of it depends on what State you live in. Some States Laws will give you a time period to return a car (even a used one) where the dealership would have to either replace the car or return your money (I think in PA it's 30 or 60 days). If that's the case in your state the dealership may have broken te law themselves. Also, The Lemon Law may not apply to a used vehicle but even that may very state to state. I don't think the dealership has any case though. It sounds like they are trying to bluff you into giving them their money back. I can't see how you would owe them any obligation to prove you had the work done or give them their money back. You took the car to a reputible mechanic who flushed the trany & told you it would need replacement. You submitted the estimate to the dealer & they paid their 50%. it's your car how you choose the to resolve the situation is up to you. You chose to sell the car. I'd tell the dealser ship to show you in writing where you signed any agreement to have the vehicle fixed and then report them to the Better Business Bureau & since most states require that dealerships be licensed, contact your state's licensing department (you should be able to get the information from the internet) & file a complaint to them. It's kind of fun to watch how quickly the dealership's attitude changes when their license is put into jepordy.

Do some internet searching for the dealership laws in your state or call a lawyer for a free consultation.

 

[jhonda]

well if they paid for a repair that you did not fix then I think you are in the wrong.
the above imformation is not by any reason to be taken seriously and will not hold up in court or anything that could get me in trouble

 

[MustangOwner]

Stealership at this point refused to take it back and wrote a check for half the balance.

I decided to sell the car and buy something cheaper

the contract stated they would cover 50% of issues and didn't say it had to be fixed within a period of time.

I took the remaining and put it towards my loan and sold the car, still oweing about $2,000 with the check I kept.

Now they call me and want a recepit to prove it was fixed and I told them I don't have one and he wants to take me to court.

According to what you've just told me.... YOUR F'ED.
If the contract stated "You must use the money to REPAIR the car they sold you" then you f'ed yourself. Because regardless if it didn't say exactly a date in which you had to have it fixed buy, it still HAD TO BE FIXED! And you sold the car and kept the money. Right there says you just f'ed yourself. And thats fraud!

Fraud: deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

You agreed on the dealership paying 50% of the cost to fix the car. Your took the money and did not fix the car. That is a "Profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage."

Sorry dude. But thats fraud and you made the mistake. Sometimes you get **** cars and you have to deal with it. Thats part of life. What you did was fraud

 

[bigcat]

think of it like an insurance claim. are not obligated to use the money they gave you to repair the car. you are stuck with a bad tranny and thats your problem. an insurance company just wont cover the cost again until it is proved that it is fixed. you are not claiming that the tranny is bad again. i believe they have no case. either way, check with a lawyer and see where you stand. better safe than sorry.

 

[hamonkeiser]

well if they paid for a repair that you did not fix then I think you are in the wrong.
the above imformation is not by any reason to be taken seriously and will not hold up in court or anything that could get me in trouble

I don't think he is. Coming from an insurance background, I don't see how a warrenty issue would be all that different from an insurance claim. If you wreck your car the insuracne compay has to pay a reasonable amount to return your car to pre accident condition. But once we give you the money how you chose to spend it is completely up to the car owner. I have customers who just chose to sell their damage car & use the insurance money for a down payment on something else. Or they'll use the money on something else entirely (like putting on new stereo in the car or buying a PS3). It happens all the time. I don't see how this situation would be any different.

 

[Darkwriter77]

Moral of the Story: Unless you're buying a brand-spankin' new car, NEVER buy from a dealership. They're in the business of making money, and they do it however the hell they possibly can. If making an extra buck means screwing over a customer now and then, they'll do it, because more often than not, the little guy getting screwed won't make a big enough stink about it to cause a problem or otherwise affect their overall profit. They're probably banking on the fact that you'll just bend over and take it raw, trying to put the blame for their own scammery upon you.

Dealerships FTL.

 

[Killer50stang]

According to what you've just told me.... YOUR F'ED.
If the contract stated "You must use the money to REPAIR the car they sold you" then you f'ed yourself. Because regardless if it didn't say exactly a date in which you had to have it fixed buy, it still HAD TO BE FIXED! And you sold the car and kept the money. Right there says you just f'ed yourself. And thats fraud!

Fraud: deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

You agreed on the dealership paying 50% of the cost to fix the car. Your took the money and did not fix the car. That is a "Profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage."

Sorry dude. But thats fraud and you made the mistake. Sometimes you get **** cars and you have to deal with it. Thats part of life. What you did was fraud

Wrong, the contract doesn't say that. It just states it will be covered 50% if there are any issues that may go wrong. Doesn't state that it has to be repaired.

 

[hamonkeiser]

According to what you've just told me.... YOUR F'ED.
Fraud: deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.:

Sorry but your way off base here. Where is the Profit or Unfair/dishonest advantage

He was sold a car with $3200 of trans damage of which the dealership by their warrenty was obligated to cover 50% of. Which they did. Where's the profit or advantage there, he was paid what was due to him, if anything he lost money & was taken advantage of.

As long as you can go back to the shop & have the tech that worked on the car give you a statement that there was metal in the trany & it needed replacement you are fine. Then you have an expert witness to back up your claim that the vehicle needed a trans.

 

[Killer50stang]

Sorry but your way off base here. Where is the Profit or Unfair/dishonest advantage

He was sold a car with $3200 of trans damage of which the dealership by their warrenty was obligated to cover 50% of. Which they did. Where's the profit or advantage there, he was paid what was due to him, if anything he lost money & was taken advantage of.

As long as you can go back to the shop & have the tech that worked on the car give you a statement that there was metal in the trany & it needed replacement you are fine. Then you have an expert witness to back up your claim that the vehicle needed a trans.

I called the mechanic and he said he's been through this crap before and he's not worried.

 

[strtrcr50]

Moral of the Story: Unless you're buying a brand-spankin' new car, NEVER buy from a dealership. They're in the business of making money, and they do it however the hell they possibly can. If making an extra buck means screwing over a customer now and then, they'll do it, because more often than not, the little guy getting screwed won't make a big enough stink about it to cause a problem or otherwise affect their overall profit. They're probably banking on the fact that you'll just bend over and take it raw, trying to put the blame for their own scammery upon you.

Dealerships FTL.

Yeah.. Great advice. Just like everything else, there are good dealerships and bad ones. The one I'm at has been there with the same family running it for 45 yrs. I'm sure that is the result of scamming people as well as all the repeat business we have. However, we are not a charitable organization and we are entitled to make a profit when we sell a car. FWIW, I know more people that have bought crap cars out of the paper than from a dealership. Let's face it, a 50/50 warranty is better than what you get when you buy a car private party. Let me guess, a car dealership ripped you off bad once?

To the OP, the dealership is coming after you because they have to submit proof of repair to the warranty company to be reminbursed. They prob will sue you. Maybe not win tho. Most times a jury will side with the customer, not the dealership.

 

[Killer50stang]

Yeah.. Great advice. Just like everything else, there are good dealerships and bad ones. The one I'm at has been there with the same family running it for 45 yrs. I'm sure that is the result of scamming people as well as all the repeat business we have. However, we are not a charitable organization and we are entitled to make a profit when we sell a car. FWIW, I know more people that have bought crap cars out of the paper than from a dealership. Let's face it, a 50/50 warranty is better than what you get when you buy a car private party. Let me guess, a car dealership ripped you off bad once?

To the OP, the dealership is coming after you because they have to submit proof of repair to the warranty company to be reminbursed. They prob will sue you. Maybe not win tho. Most times a jury will side with the customer, not the dealership.

Grasp my point. All this happened within two weeks of owning it and they did not fix the internals but half the check. I saved my self more of a loss and sold it and still lost $2,000 on the deal. Where is there argument?

 

[strtrcr50]

At least in NJ, there is a lemon law on used cars. You prob could have forced them to take the car back. They only paid 1/2 of the bill to check out the car? Or 1/2 of the bill to fix it?

 

[Darkwriter77]

Yeah.. Great advice. Just like everything else, there are good dealerships and bad ones. The one I'm at has been there with the same family running it for 45 yrs. I'm sure that is the result of scamming people as well as all the repeat business we have. However, we are not a charitable organization and we are entitled to make a profit when we sell a car. FWIW, I know more people that have bought crap cars out of the paper than from a dealership. Let's face it, a 50/50 warranty is better than what you get when you buy a car private party. Let me guess, a car dealership ripped you off bad once?

To the OP, the dealership is coming after you because they have to submit proof of repair to the warranty company to be reminbursed. They prob will sue you. Maybe not win tho. Most times a jury will side with the customer, not the dealership.

Being that you work for a dealership, I'd say your response is a bit biased, to say the least.

Dealerships haven't ripped me off, because 90% of the vehicles I've bought over the years have been directly from individuals. Those used cars that I have bought from dealerships have consistently had at least a few things in common: they're glossed-over turds, they're grossly overpriced for what they are, and any mechanical flaws in the vehicle are generally jury-rigged only well enough that a buyer will not readily notice them, or they will usually not become a serious issue for 30 to 90 days (el crap-o brake pads, slapped-together A/C repairs, cheap body work, etc.). Minimize initial cost, maximize end profits. Sure, there's a few "honest" dealers out there, but by and large, they're more concerned with the end (sales, profit) than they are with the means (customer service, personal integrity).

They've earned their nickname as Stealerships for a reason, and it hasn't been by being cool about honoring their own warranties.

Dealerships are pointless, really. What're you paying the extra money for when buying from a dealership? Some dude in a cheap suit to convince you that some total turdbox is the car of your dreams? Some 16-year-old porter to vacuum out and spray a bunch of Armorall and Tire Wet on the car? The luxury of having a whole bunch of cars gathered together in one geographical location so that you can physically peruse them? The JOY of paying sales tax? (Here in AZ, you don't have to pay sales tax when buying from an individual, but you do when buying from a dealer.)

If anything, it's the almight warranty that draws folks ... and warranties, 95% of the time, are a sham. You don't honestly believe that a dealership is so honest and sure of their cars that they won't go to great lengths to have more loopholes in their warranty claims than an old woman's cross-stitching project, so they can get out of actually having to take back lemon cars, fix broken crap, and/or pay out refunds for warranty claims ... do you? Lshrug:

 

[strtrcr50]

First off, We don't sell crap. Second off, I know exactly what the extended warranties cover and do not. I find it funny that people who can justify buying a 3-4 yr old terminator cobra for what it cost new after rebates calls a dealership a stealership. Used car dealerships suck, plain and simple. I am NOT defending them.

If anything, it's the almight warranty that draws folks ... and warranties, 95% of the time, are a sham. You don't honestly believe that a dealership is so honest and sure of their cars that they won't go to great lengths to have more loopholes in their warranty claims than an old woman's cross-stitching project, so they can get out of actually having to take back lemon cars, fix broken crap, and/or pay out refunds for warranty claims ... do you?

With this mentality, there's no point in even having this discussion. You do know that the dealership MAKES money doing warranty repairs, right? That's right.. It costs them nothing and they actually GET PAID for doing it. So, tell me why I would try to get out of making money in both my parts and service dept? The extended warranty company pays the dealership.

 

[strtrcr50]

For what it's worth, I've heard that Bill Heard near you is a rip off artist. Not all of us are. Some of us work hard to make sure the customer is happy.

 

[justabigkid]

First of all in most states lemon law only applies to new cars and the car has to have come in for the same problem numerous times, no multiple problems. Second of all if you paid extra for the contract most contracts will refund you a portion of the purchase price for unused time, so since you only had the car for a couple of weeks you obviously had time left.

I am also surprised that you got the money before you got the work done... very odd, or that they did not want to inspect it themselves.